UHD Review A Few Words About A few words about...™ -Out of Sight -- in 4k UHD (1 Viewer)

[Robert Crawford]

Of course, the question now is whether this is what he wanted the movie to look like when he photographed it, or is it what he wants it to look today? These two things can be very different.

Regarding that question, I agree with you as we know these filmmakers have a tendency to change their minds in that regard.

 

[Carlo_M]

My first viewing I watched about the first 30 minutes with full attention, and then started multitasking with the movie on, so I'd say at that point it had half my attention. Which is why the examples I noted were from early in the movie. And most of the second half of the movie occurs in Detroit which is the more desaturated part of the movie.

I know people are different, and some may not even notice in casual viewings the things I'm bringing up. What's noteworthy to me, is on first viewing, my brain I spotted those two immediately to think "wait that can't be right". Maybe my eyes and brain are just more sensitive to changes in brightness, which can affect color perception, than they are to other problems that our membership points out in other releases that escape my eye (for example, I'll say I have a real hard time sometimes distinguishing film grain from other unwanted noise).

I guess my takeaway is how potentially different an HDR10 and a DV10 presentation can be, not just from the BD release (presumably authored from the same master), but from each other. That's the part that now gives me pause. The same 4K encode on disc, but HDR10 does one thing, DV does another. So by that very definition we have two slightly (in the best case) to potentially noticeable (in this case, to me) different end results.

In modern MCU type films, I admit I go back to Dolby Vision on Disney+ releases, and HDR10 on their physical release, and outside of the IMAX taller framing, I don't really notice HDR10/DV differences. But when it affects a stylized palette like what Mr. Soderbergh and Mr. Davis were doing in the Miami scenes, it really drew my eye.

 

[dpippel]

Another thing to keep in mind is this: your display is going to kick in completely different settings and presets for HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision. That could also be a factor at play here - how well each of these profiles is calibrated on your particular panel. They ARE different, on every 4K display I'm aware of that supports both.

 

[Robert Crawford]

My first viewing I watched about the first 30 minutes with full attention, and then started multitasking with the movie on, so I'd say at that point it had half my attention. Which is why the examples I noted were from early in the movie. And most of the second half of the movie occurs in Detroit which is the more desaturated part of the movie.

I know people are different, and some may not even notice in casual viewings the things I'm bringing up. What's noteworthy to me, is on first viewing, my brain I spotted those two immediately to think "wait that can't be right". Maybe my eyes and brain are just more sensitive to changes in brightness, which can affect color perception, than they are to other problems that our membership points out in other releases that escape my eye (for example, I'll say I have a real hard time sometimes distinguishing film grain from other unwanted noise).

I guess my takeaway is how potentially different an HDR10 and a DV10 presentation can be, not just from the BD release (presumably authored from the same master), but from each other. That's the part that now gives me pause. The same 4K encode on disc, but HDR10 does one thing, DV does another. So by that very definition we have two slightly (in the best case) to potentially noticeable (in this case, to me) different end results.

In modern MCU type films, I admit I go back to Dolby Vision on Disney+ releases, and HDR10 on their physical release, and outside of the IMAX taller framing, I don't really notice HDR10/DV differences. But when it affects a stylized palette like what Mr. Soderbergh and Mr. Davis were doing in the Miami scenes, it really drew my eye.

Carlo,
Let me just say that I'm in no way disputing anything you have observed or written about this 4K disc. Other than that, I've said my piece and I'm very happy with the 4K/DV presentation.

 

[Carlo_M]

Another thing to keep in mind is this: your display is going to kick in completely different settings and presets for HDR10 vs. Dolby Vision. That could also be a factor at play here - how well each of these profiles is calibrated on your particular panel. They ARE different, on every 4K display I'm aware of that supports both.

You know, I think in the back of my mind I knew or suspected this could be a contributing factor...but now that you put it out in writing, I think this is an underappreciated/unacknowledged side product of HDR application and playback.

Maybe my LG C1 does something funky on DV in this particular case? Might a Sony handle it better? Or a C2/G2?

I have some meetings now but later today I might pop this into the bedroom where I have an older Sony LED TV which does DV and see if a 5 year older Sony LED TV handles it differently.

 

[dpippel]

Good luck, Carlo. Looking forward to your findings.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

My first viewing I watched about the first 30 minutes with full attention, and then started multitasking with the movie on, so I'd say at that point it had half my attention. Which is why the examples I noted were from early in the movie. And most of the second half of the movie occurs in Detroit which is the more desaturated part of the movie.

I know people are different, and some may not even notice in casual viewings the things I'm bringing up. What's noteworthy to me, is on first viewing, my brain I spotted those two immediately to think "wait that can't be right". Maybe my eyes and brain are just more sensitive to changes in brightness, which can affect color perception, than they are to other problems that our membership points out in other releases that escape my eye (for example, I'll say I have a real hard time sometimes distinguishing film grain from other unwanted noise).

I guess my takeaway is how potentially different an HDR10 and a DV10 presentation can be, not just from the BD release (presumably authored from the same master), but from each other. That's the part that now gives me pause. The same 4K encode on disc, but HDR10 does one thing, DV does another. So by that very definition we have two slightly (in the best case) to potentially noticeable (in this case, to me) different end results.

In modern MCU type films, I admit I go back to Dolby Vision on Disney+ releases, and HDR10 on their physical release, and outside of the IMAX taller framing, I don't really notice HDR10/DV differences. But when it affects a stylized palette like what Mr. Soderbergh and Mr. Davis were doing in the Miami scenes, it really drew my eye.

I’m very familiar with this period of Soderbergh, but I’m not equipped for 4K yet so I can’t comment on this disc.

But your observations here made me think of how new productions today are finalized. Back when Out Of Sight was made, for the overwhelming majority of productions, filmmakers would sign off on an approved answer print and that was the look that all subsequent releases would try as best as possible to emulate. Home video releases were limited by resolution and color space of standard definition formats so it wouldn’t always be a perfect translation, but the idea was certainly to get the gist of it correct.

For films made today, the idea of there being one perfect version that all other versions are derived from has mostly fallen by the wayside. When films are in post production now, the filmmakers are tasked with providing a variety of deliverables simultaneously: 2K and 4K DCPs for standard digital projection, a DCP specifically mastered for Dolby Cinema auditoriums, a DCP specifically mastered for IMAX auditoriums, a 4K DCP with HDR for laser projectors not branded by IMAX or Dolby, a 4K UHD home version with Dolby Vision and/or HDR10, a 1080p HD version, and a standard definition version. Each of these is generally created at the same time, with the filmmakers tweaking each one based on the specifications of each format. Each will look slightly to somewhat different than the other by design.

Essentially, we’ve gone from having one master reference source of “this is how the movie is supposed to look” to having multiple correct options, like, “this is how the movie is supposed to look if you see it in 2K digital projection” and “this is how the movie is supposed to look if you watch it on a 4K UHD TV with Dolby Vision,” etc.

It would seem entirely possible that when cinematographers and directors come back to supervise the transfers of their older works that they are going through a similar process with a similar mindset where the thinking isn’t necessarily to deliver something that matches a theatrical release print from 25 years ago, but to deliver something that has been, I guess I’d say translated, into the visual vernacular of these newer formats.

For my own personal viewing, one of the reasons I haven’t felt an overwhelming need to rush out and buy new hardware I can’t really afford at the moment is that no theatrical release print would have ever had anything close to 4K resolution or HDR-type color space, so I don’t feel that I’m losing out by not seeing these films in versions that reveal more detail and have a wider range of color than their original presentations did. But I don’t think there’s anything wrong with these versions existing or others having different preferences. I think it’s understandable that if 4K HDR is here to stay (and I believe it is) that it makes a certain amount of sense to optimize the presentation of older films to look as good as they can in this format, since that’s how they’ll be seen more often than not going forward. But I do think that also results in the filmmakers and studios making choices that are beyond what was possible when they made the film in the first place, especially if they’re embracing the idea that there’s more than one correct version possible.

 

[sleroi]

Last time I viewed this film was on DVD. All I really remembered was detail wise was that the Florida scenes were bright and colorful while the Detroit scenes were darker and bluer.

This 4k disc retains that dynamic. My naked eye didn't notice any change in color from long shot to close-up. I haven't come across any evidence that Soderbergh intentionally wanted the bright scenes to look washed out a la the Godfather.

The film is gorgeous to me on this disc and between that, the great acting and fun,clever writing I am a very happy viewer. I've watched it 3 times in the last two weeks.

I am sorry it is so troubling for you. I know we all have films or scenes that for whatever reason seem off to us. Not to derail this thread, but the 4k of Escape From New York looks almost too sterile and just feels wrong to me. But I am far more familiar with EFNY than Out of Sight.

 

[Carlo_M]

I'll add this: those two were semi-eyesores in the first 30 minutes. If the rest of the film, when I get a chance to really sit down and watch the full thing carefully, is fine, it's something I can live with, especially if it's a byproduct of DV playback (it will be really eye-opening if the Sony TV somehow handles it better).

Speaking of, if the Sony does handle it better, that opens a whole new can of worms, because DV decoding and application at the playback stage is, to my knowledge, not something that is "user" or even "technician" fixable. We can all get our sets professionally calibrated to set color temperature, white balance, all the ISF standards goodness. But I'm not aware of an ability to "alter Dolby Vision playback settings to conform to ..." whatever is best. We are basically beholden to HDR10/10+ and DV hardware algorithms that the TV manufacturers, in conjunction with Dolby Labs (in the case of DV) implement.

Or maybe it just affects films containing scenes a very stylized, blown out look. And maybe even then, if the person supervising the Dolby Vision application is familiar with the film, he/she can dial down the DV algorithm to leave those scenes looking consistent to the original intent. As I mentioned, looking at the Disney+ DV versions of the MCU films, I never noticed anything of this sort.

 

[Scott Merryfield]

My wife and I watched the UHD of this film last night. While I thought I had seen the film before, I was mistaken -- must have been thinking about another movie. Anyway, I didn't really notice the issues that @Carlo Medina pointed out during our viewing. I do have both the HDR10 and Dolby Vision settings calibrated separately on my Vizio 70-inch LED display, and was using a Panasonic 820 player. So it was a very different setup than Carlo's LG display and Oppo player.

BTW, my wife and I both really enjoyed the film. It was cool seeing the scenes in Detroit. The state was offering incentives to Hollywood for a few years to shoot films in Michigan.

 

[Tom St Jones]

I think the people out there complaining about the colors on this release (compared to the 1080 Blu) suffer from “it’s different so it must be wrong” syndrome. Blu-Ray discs aren’t reference materials, but often forums and some reviewers treat deviations from prior releases in color timing as errors when they’re often corrections.

To your point: John Carpenter's "Halloween" has been issued on Blu-ray and (since 2018) UHD four times since the arrival of high-def disc, with the film undergoing a remastering each time. The color timing of the original Blu (based on the HD master created for the 25th Annivrsary "Divimax" DVD) was highly controversial, so when it came time to reissue the film for it's 35th annivrsary, AnchorBay made sure to secure cinematographer Dean Cundey to oversee the color timing. Since then, with each reissue, Cundey has created/approved a new color timing.. If anyone knows how the film should look, he does, and yet each new edition has looked (atleast a little) different from the one before it... Which one is "right"? ...or are they ALL (save maybe the first edition) "right"?

 

[Worth]

...Since then, with each reissue, Cundey has created/approved a new color timing.. If anyone knows how the film should look, he does, and yet each new edition has looked (atleast a little) different from the one before it... Which one is "right"? ...or are they ALL (save maybe the first edition) "right"?

They're all how he wants them to look at that particular moment. I doubt any of them look the way it looked when it was originally released.

 

[DarkVader]

This movie earned her the last of her five Academy Award nominations. I believe the first was for Lawrence of Arabia.


Your loss.

It truly is.